Tweet of the Day (6th May 2022)

I dont know if it is just me.  But twitter sucks up an absurd amount of time.  One single simple throwaway tweet can create an obsession in me. You start writing a reply, and nah don't have time to get involved in a twitter argument.  Delete.  Then okay I'll just make my point and leave.  So you start writing again.  Then delete again as you realise half way through you haven't a clue what you are talking about.  And so begins hours of research, analysis and rethinking and maybe a reply comes out of that and maybe not because now you have so much to say 256 characters are not enough (plus twitter has moved on).  

This set me off last night

https://twitter.com/JeffreyBenson12/status/1522353212325462016

Guys in Stiff Suits

So apparently Bet365 dont know what they are doing.  They have no clue.  Likewise Skybet, William Hill, Paddy Power and basically all the major hugely successfully bookmaking companies.  They're just paper pushers, they won't last.  And certainly their ideas won't catch on or spread.  Especially not in the USA where their bettors are bigger and better and won't stand for that kind of thing.

Anyway, that's not the interesting part of the tweet.  It's the figures quoted.

6% of a million

Now I am sure these are not meant to be genuine figures or projections.  Just plucked out of air to make a point.  6% of a million is 60K.  The assumption is that you are only taking a million because you are restricting bettors (mostly winners, but others will get caught in your net).  Add in those accounts and imagine it does bring another 4 million.  However you wont be better than break even on that extra, you'll be losing on 90%+ of it!  How you would make another 90K on this mostly sharp action is a head scratcher.

So perhaps the extra 4 million is not coming from sharps.  The sharps have sharpened the line and given the bookie more confidence in its pricing.  It can now increase the limits for the losers without fear of being picked off.  In my opinion this raises all sorts of Problem Gambling issues.  Plus who wants a sharper line.  If 90% of the public want to bet on the Overs you will make more money if you set the line at 50.5.  You really dont want the line sharpened into 49.5.

Conclusion

My opinion is that gambling should be safe, fun and open/honest.  

A high turnover model that relies on maximising your profits from your biggest losers is nothing to be boastful of.  I think it can put people at risk - your own customers at risk.  

Second it should be fun, the overwhelming majority of punters do not care about winners restricted.  It will never affect them.  What they want are promotions, more markets etc.

On the third point, open and honest Mr Benson's company is top of the class.  They tell it as it is.  Limits clearly defined and displayed and they speak openly about their practices.  The other companies want to keep it a secret that they don't allow winning bettors.  

Revisited

I am revisiting this to add some quotes from the "Be Bettor Betters" interview.  Beginning by emphasising that I am in complete agreement in the fairness, equality and transparency.  However some things that are said were:

"Make up for the low hold part with a high Volume", "limits ... being at 100K day of", "you feel comfortable booking both sides".

Reading into these quotes then my question would be to Jeff Benson - are you comfortable booking bets of 100K on the day of to recreational bettors?  Is that the aim to maximise the stakes up to 100K from recreational bettors?  Does this cause him any concern with regards Problem Gamblers?